The Apprentice - 2015
Discussion
blueg33 said:
KTF said:
"Hello, I am from match.com. What's to stop me getting one of my developers from making something similar?"
What do you mean no one asked that question?
Maybe the idea is patentented. You can be sure the industry experts giving advice have signed non compete agreementsWhat do you mean no one asked that question?
I'm afraid her business plan looked like so many Kickstarters. Someone has put 2 ideas together, and said "hey how hard can it be?" and aims to get loads of money then hire people who can do it all. An idea that can be instantly copied by existing businesses who already have a complete infrastructure of developers who know exactly what they are doing, and what the pitfalls are along the way. Personally, I think she is going to be up against it trying to find games that appear to similar demographics of different genders. Now, had she said she was targeting same sex relationships, she might have found it somewhat easier.
The idea of using 250k as seedcorn to generate more VC, and then more, and more... with zero income and a product that could be copied overnight would make me nervous as an early investor too. Chances are that you would get a tiny fraction of your 1p in the pound when it all went titsup. The main hope would be to get bought out by the dating equivalent of Google.
Joseph was a good choice. Throughout the series he had been genuinely good and effective in at least some of the tasks, even if he did (and still does) look like a used car salesman. His "product" is based on something tangible that exists already, and is in a pre-existing mature market. Sure it isn't a massively revolutionary idea, but it has the potential to be a decent, reliable business with long term growth that greatly benefits from marketing experience. I think it is far easier to keep a track of how a business like this is performing, rather than an intangible product that exists in some vague virtual realm of leveraged finances.
I thought it was interesting when Milordsugar said to come back in 12 years. That was my feeling for most of the contestants. Presumably the producers feel older people haven't got the arrogance that TV demands, or there are so few older people who are mug enough to enter. Personally, I would love to see a slightly different programme with older people (say 40 to well over retirement age) showing they have the capabilities and ideas to run a business.
The idea of using 250k as seedcorn to generate more VC, and then more, and more... with zero income and a product that could be copied overnight would make me nervous as an early investor too. Chances are that you would get a tiny fraction of your 1p in the pound when it all went titsup. The main hope would be to get bought out by the dating equivalent of Google.
Joseph was a good choice. Throughout the series he had been genuinely good and effective in at least some of the tasks, even if he did (and still does) look like a used car salesman. His "product" is based on something tangible that exists already, and is in a pre-existing mature market. Sure it isn't a massively revolutionary idea, but it has the potential to be a decent, reliable business with long term growth that greatly benefits from marketing experience. I think it is far easier to keep a track of how a business like this is performing, rather than an intangible product that exists in some vague virtual realm of leveraged finances.
I thought it was interesting when Milordsugar said to come back in 12 years. That was my feeling for most of the contestants. Presumably the producers feel older people haven't got the arrogance that TV demands, or there are so few older people who are mug enough to enter. Personally, I would love to see a slightly different programme with older people (say 40 to well over retirement age) showing they have the capabilities and ideas to run a business.
oyster said:
Mercury00 said:
jammy_basturd said:
So which candidates weren't in the audience? I didn't see Dubai girl.
The Jamaican woman, plus Scott and Selina. Oh, the gay 'wordsmith' too. Personally I think the only thing Joseph did noticeable well all series was in the handyman task doing his day job!
To me that final just showed that the whole thing doesn't work with a prize of only £250K.
Under the old "apprentice" formula the final would have been Richard vs Varna. Both credible candidates who could do well in business.
Now it is about providing enough funds for a plumbing business to expand...
Yes Varna's idea was very risky, but there will be many high quality business ideas that need far more than £250K to get off the ground.
To me that final just showed that the whole thing doesn't work with a prize of only £250K.
Under the old "apprentice" formula the final would have been Richard vs Varna. Both credible candidates who could do well in business.
Now it is about providing enough funds for a plumbing business to expand...
Yes Varna's idea was very risky, but there will be many high quality business ideas that need far more than £250K to get off the ground.
It depends how you define "get off the ground". Yes, Vana's idea would probably need a huge amount more than £250k before it becomes profitable, but it should only take a fraction of that to prove that it works. Unfortunately, it was her job to prove that the idea would work in 2 days, which is pretty much impossible given the constraints the show put on her.
ash73 said:
Does it really cost so much to launch an app? A couple of coders, two graphics bods, a database guy, Vana doing the marketing, that's 6 people, let's say 6 months development @ £50K annual salary, that's £150K leaving £100K for kit, setting things up and product launch. Sounds doable to me, if the idea's a good one.
http://savvyapps.com/blog/how-much-does-app-cost-massive-review-pricing-budget-considerationsThe problem for Vana is not in building the app for £250k.
It's the building it, letting people use it for free, heavily marketing it to get millions of users, then working out how to monetise it, then developing those monetising features - only then starting to bring in revenue, all whilst having operational and marketing costs of running an app that millions of people are using. Then becoming profitable.
It's the building it, letting people use it for free, heavily marketing it to get millions of users, then working out how to monetise it, then developing those monetising features - only then starting to bring in revenue, all whilst having operational and marketing costs of running an app that millions of people are using. Then becoming profitable.
ash73 said:
wiggy001 said:
FourWheelDrift said:
Interesting article.article said:
A somewhat typical budget at savvy apps for a v1.0 buildout in 2014 was just around $150,000. The total spend per customer was often higher than that because our customers continue to have us design and develop new features, month after month.
So I wasn't far off!article also said said:
apps that are built for a smartphone and tablet, that have a complex user interface, or that require a significant backend can cost anywhere from $250,000 to $1,500,000.
I would imagine Vana's solution will require a significant backend (depending on the definition of significant). But I agree with the other post - building the app isn't the issue. Making money out of it is.Her app is quite complex, though. If you look at Tinder (or Grindr, whatever floats your boat) - it's massively simple. Load picture, swipe left for yes, right for no. Easy to build, easy to test, easy to use. Vana's app is based around games, which need a game engine, all the logic, all the maths, all the permutations. Significantly more complex.
The most successful apps are simple and addictive with in-app purchases to monetise them. I can imagine Date Play becoming pretty tedious after you've dicked around for a few days to get to the point of revealing that the person you're playing against is a hound.
The most successful apps are simple and addictive with in-app purchases to monetise them. I can imagine Date Play becoming pretty tedious after you've dicked around for a few days to get to the point of revealing that the person you're playing against is a hound.
Good summing up on here - http://www.alphr.com/business/1002276/the-apprenti...
FourWheelDrift said:
Good summing up on here - http://www.alphr.com/business/1002276/the-apprenti...
Yep, nice article. Particularly the difference between a game, and a good game. Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff